Are we really thinking everything through?

[MrPolo]

indeed. Just like eating meat on a Friday. oh wait... that's ok now.

I know you said in the other thread you have trouble determining what constitutes faith and morals. If I may help, disciplinary ordinances like Friday meat practices are not faith and morals and can change. Why are you so flippant and sarcastic against Catholicism again lately? That's not the way to come to much of an understanding of anything. It's a recipe for perpetual blindness really.

 

[MrPolo]

The only thing he mentions is ones burning and that its would be better to marry then to burn, for example my sisters case, married so they would not burn, but now shes allergic to his "you know what", the condom would still be able to satisfy any burning either of them have, but making the condom a sin would make them no better then unmarried and burning when such a simple thing takes care of the problem for the both of them.

No matter how many times I read your explanation, the passage still does not say that the quelling of burning should block out fertility which is against the natural end of the act. Again, since your sister has the incredibly rare allergy (whatever her allergic reaction is???) to husband's junk, then I suggest you call the apologist.

 

[Uphill Battle]

I know you said in the other thread you have trouble determining what constitutes faith and morals. If I may help, disciplinary ordinances like Friday meat practices are not faith and morals and can change. Why are you so flippant and sarcastic against Catholicism again lately? That's not the way to come to much of an understanding of anything. It's a recipe for perpetual blindness really.

because intellectual discourse is automatically filed under the "you just don't get it" category.

and, the one issue, (infallible statements/rules that harm people) is very extremely vexing.

 

[Athanasias]

I posted this in another discussion, which has since been ignored. I'd like some other perspectives on this, as I believe it bears discussing.

note that as it's possible the person I was speaking with wanted to abandon the line of thought, I have removed their name from THIS post, and only put in brackets the point they were making. I have not misrepresented them in any way.






you'll excuse my late reply, but this topic is one that raises my blood pressure greatly. I chose to wait until now instead of post hostile text against you, the poster, which is not warranted. My issue is with certain practices of the Church, not you personally.



(Catholic Doctrines should not affect you as you are not Catholic)

This is the crux of my complaint. The Catholic Church feels it has the right to say anything, and if anyone outside their organization complains, this is the standard response.

what you seem to miss is that their statements have far greater impact than that.

take for instance the recent hoopla regarding Benedict forwarding the churches' position on condoms, in aids stricken nations. It was an remarkably foolish statement, given what the pretext of anti-condom thinking is.

it's supposed to prevent lives being stopped through condom use, in the name of the sanctity of life, and instead, it condemns some to die, because of the rule that must not be broken.

on a more individual level, a couple who it was deadly to the wife to conceive, but when he sterilized himself so they could enjoy at least a mostly normal marriage, excommunication was the result.

the list could go on, but I hope you've seen the point I am trying to make.

rules come before common sense and critical thinking, and what was sought to be prevented, is actually acheived!

it is not sufficient to say "oh, it's just for us." If that's true, then don't say it. Send it only to your own, stop affecting everyone else with it.

this is on TOP of the fact that the position is flawed to begin with, in regards to contraception.

I agree with the RC's position on abortion, but I do not think that includes situations where death is the logical conclusion of the pregancy, either to the child, the mother, or both.

and the worst part is when they make these proclamations, they do so under the pretense that they speak soley for Christ. I have co-workers that before I corrected them, assumed I was as short sighted on matters such as contraception, because the Pope said it, and aren't you Catholic because you believe in Jesus?

fallout of actions go much farther than you pretend.



(Nobody has been tossed out of the Catholic Church for getting an abortion.)

you sure about that? never?

Abortion and Excommunication - Catholic Christian Article

"Any Catholic who obstinately denies that abortion is always gravely immoral, commits the sin of heresy and incurs an automatic sentence of excommunication. "


​

so either this is wrong, or you are. Kindly identify which.


(nobody on this thread knew anything about Catholic doctrine other than me.)

I do not believe that line. I don't buy in to the "if you don't agree, you don't understand." It's a halfhearted argument, that does not ring true.

​

(The Catholic Church always acts with compassion. Condoning sin is not compassion)

using the example regarding condoms in Africa, that is as far from compassion as you can stray. It puts no thought in to the matter at all. And unfortunately for the Catholic Church, it can't step back from a flawed perspective because it's claimed the rule as immutable.

​

(Scripture states that the Catholic Church is to guide Christianity)

indeed. Shepherds are to guide.

NOT rule.

guide. And when the shepherd is trying to make the sheep act like ducks, they aren't doing a good job of guiding.

I do not believe, nor accept, that scripture at all anywhere gives the Roman Catholic Church the authority it claims. I'd accept that they have the right to guide, any who believe that the Catholic Church is their chosen sect, and if they are convinced that the Catholic Magisterium should be their leaders.

but that is a far cry from a lineage of supposed overlords who's word is law.

Take the adulterous women for example. the rule? adultery=stoning. Did Christ not have the "right" to enforce that law, and see her stoned? far more so than the Magesterium claims they have in canon law enforcement.

however, he does not. And for no more reason than his own mercy! And those who claim to speak for him cannot be as merciful, even when there is good reason to do so?

I'm sorry, but I find that ludicrous.



now, I know I have likely offended you with this post, but understand, I do not have a bone to pick with Catholics. nor, with most of Catholic practice. THIS particular teaching, however, and a few others, are vinegar in my lemonade, so to speak, so forgive the offense, I merely speak my mind regarding the RULE and not you, or any other, as the individual.
​

I am glad the Catholic Church doctrine is getting under your skin and bothering you. This is a good sign and will get you to study the theology of Christ Catholic church. Maybe you should take a college course on Philosophy and theology at a Catholic university. The Holy Spirit could be speaking to you!

here is a great university to go to

Ave Maria University

 

[Fireinfolding]

No matter how many times I read your explanation, the passage still does not say that the quelling of burning should block out fertility which is against the natural end of the act. Again, since your sister has the incredibly rare allergy (whatever her allergic reaction is???) to husband's junk, then I suggest you call the apologist.

Yep, his stuff or his junk, tis true

They wouldnt go to an apologist, He just drives to the drug store and picks up a condom, and that takes care of the problem

They'd never question such things

 

[Fireinfolding]

I still highly doubt condom use would be condoned for reasons I told you in my last post to you. But you would get a surer answer from someone else if you want the Catholic teaching on the matter. You might want to call one of the Catholic apologists or the apologetics hotline at Catholic Answers. Tonight is open forum Q&A where you could ask it live on the air. It's 2 hours starting at 6:00 eastern. Radio number is 1-888-318-7884.

You can also call their general apologetic off-the-air line at 1-619-387-7200 any time you want.

Thanks They would have never thought to ask, I was just curious but since I wouldnt take them too seriously either way I will pass, but thanks for the kind offer, I know you mean well by it

 

[Uphill Battle]

I am glad the Catholic Church doctrine is getting under your skin and bothering you. This is a good sign and will get you to study the theology of Christ Catholic church. Maybe you should take a college course on Philosophy and theology at a Catholic university. The Holy Spirit could be speaking to you!

here is a great university to go to

Ave Maria University

it's a good sign I find some of the teachings ludicrous?

this must be the same mindset as "posting catholic conversion stories will save the world."

 

[Rick Otto]

No matter how many times I read your explanation, the passage still does not say that the quelling of burning should block out fertility which is against the natural end of the act. Again, since your sister has the incredibly rare allergy (whatever her allergic reaction is???) to husband's junk, then I suggest you call the apologist.

Wouldnt the medical necessity make the fertility block a non-issue?
Still, I would like a second opinion from a licensed, practicing apologist.

 

[Uphill Battle]

No matter how many times I read your explanation, the passage still does not say that the quelling of burning should block out fertility which is against the natural end of the act. Again, since your sister has the incredibly rare allergy (whatever her allergic reaction is???) to husband's junk, then I suggest you call the apologist.

It WOULD be interesting to find out, only because they'd have to finally admit that there are situations the INFALLIBE RULE(tm) doesn't cover.

 

[Fireinfolding]

It WOULD be interesting to find out, only because they'd have to finally admit that there are situations the INFALLIBE RULE(tm) doesn't cover.

Call I dare ya

 

[Fireinfolding]

Wouldnt the medical necessity make the fertility block a non-issue?
Still, I would like a second opinion from a licensed, practicing apologist.

I think medical necessities = abstinence in every case

 

[Uphill Battle]

Call I dare ya

nah. even if I did, if I posted an unfavorable response for the Catholic side, it wouldn't be believed.

 

[Fireinfolding]

nah. even if I did, if I posted an unfavorable response for the Catholic side, it wouldn't be believed.

Put it on youtube, cover your butt

 

[Uphill Battle]

Put it on youtube, cover your butt

why though? you can even point out a huge whole in someones established position (Catholic or otherwise, it's not unique)

and it doesn't make a lick of difference.

 

[Fireinfolding]

why though? you can even point out a huge whole in someones established position (Catholic or otherwise, it's not unique)

and it doesn't make a lick of difference.

I agree, holes in either condoms or doctrines can be real shockers

 

[Athanasias]

it's a good sign I find some of the teachings ludicrous?

this must be the same mindset as "posting catholic conversion stories will save the world."

Yes. I found many of the teaching ludicrous and tried to take my mom out of the Catholic chruch years ago. That is how I started out. Then I studied the catholic faith and was suprised by Catholic truth. Can't pat the hound of heaven without getting bit!

Check out Ave maria Univerity.

 

[Uphill Battle]

Yes. I found many of the teaching ludicrous and tried to take my mom out of the Catholic chruch years ago. That is how I started out. Then I studied the catholic faith and was suprised by Catholic truth. Can't pat the hound of heaven without getting bit!

Check out Ave maria Univerity.

funnily enough, the more I look at some of the teachings, the more ludicrous they seem.


I have to admire that nothing dampens your spirits. Admirable I guess, in the face of contrary evidence.

 

[MrPolo]

funnily enough, the more I look at some of the teachings, the more ludicrous they seem.

Athanasias is right. The Catholic Church intrigues you and that's why it bothers you. Maybe it's the sexual teaching. All your recent threads seem to revolve around being bothered by the Church possibly being infallible and teaching against certain sexual practices....

Ever heard of a Rorschach blot.....

When you finally decide to be Catholic, I hope Athanasias and I can be the first to welcome you home!!


.

 

[Uphill Battle]

Athanasias is right. The Catholic Church intrigues you and that's why it bothers you. Maybe it's the sexual teaching. All your recent threads seem to revolve around being bothered by the Church possibly being infallible and teaching against certain sexual practices....

Ever heard of a Rorschach blot.....

When you finally decide to be Catholic, I hope Athanasias and I can be the first to welcome you home!!


.

actually, the irritation stems from common example in my own life.

1) a dear friend who is pregnant, who unfortunately has had her baby develop without a brain. According to the doctors, it is not really alive, but the flesh remains active due to the support of the womb/umbilical system.

the response? "no, you must carry it to term, and deliver it dead, as aborting the (dead) fetus would be sinful.

2) in my OWN life, constant judgement from Catholics because we unrepentantly used birth control over the last few years, as my wife has a condition that pregnancy could be fatal to the baby, mother, or both.
(ironic, as we'd desired a child, and started trying, just before she was diagnosed.) We've since been given the all clear due to her treatment, but I feel no guilt, no shame, and no sin in protecting my wife and future child, yet the condemnation that oozed out of any Catholics that knew about it (on here or not) was vile.

don't expect a membership application any time soon. If I were to join any of the ancient churches, it would be Orthodox... I don't agree with a bunch of what they say to, but they're an awful lot less militant on some key issues...they don't feel like they have to conquer the world with a sword.

It may be true that much of my issues with the Catholic Church have to do with their teachings on sexuality... but that's more from the rampant misogynistic attitudes that I've run up against, than any overdone fascination with sex.

 

[MrPolo]

1) a dear friend who is pregnant, who unfortunately has had her baby develop without a brain. According to the doctors, it is not really alive, but the flesh remains active due to the support of the womb/umbilical system.

the response? "no, you must carry it to term, and deliver it dead, as aborting the (dead) fetus would be sinful.

2) in my OWN life, constant judgement from Catholics because we unrepentantly used birth control over the last few years, as my wife has a condition that pregnancy could be fatal to the baby, mother, or both.
(ironic, as we'd desired a child, and started trying, just before she was diagnosed.) We've since been given the all clear due to her treatment, but I feel no guilt, no shame, and no sin in protecting my wife and future child, yet the condemnation that oozed out of any Catholics that knew about it (on here or not) was vile.

Ok, I was right it is the sexual teaching. I understand this is very personal to you and that often causes great struggle with morality in the lives of Christians. No one here is offering cross-bearing-free Catholicism. No one here is offering suffering-free Christianity. We have declared saints of women who refused to terminate the life of their baby even when their own lives were in jeopardy. These mothers believed it was sinful to actively kill another and thus leave their own lives in God's hands. For you, it sounds like you believe you are still putting your wife's life in danger because contraception is not foolproof. I don't think anyone here envies your situation. As a Catholic, I have a great deal of sympathy for those who are given such big crosses to bear. But I also believe such Christian suffering is the very participation in Christ's suffering that delivers us from this perverted world.

In the case of your friend and the doctor, why didn't the doctor's declare the child dead? Did the doctor believe the child was suffering from anencephaly, perhaps? Although rare, a human being can live in this condition. Last year there was a story about Nicholas Coke who celebrated his first birthday in such a condition. It's quite a story. But the point is, Nicholas is a human being. That is the question. Is it a human being? If yes, then to actively terminate it's life is by definition murder. It sounds like your friend wanted to abort the child because it would be emotionally difficult to give birth only to see the baby, most likely, die soon thereafter? Certainly, that is not a position one desires to find oneself.